BIRTH OF FILIPINO

Nationalism

Group Members:
Falcasantos, Rica Amor R.
Hablan, Clarysse Faith M.
Macavinta, Anezka Joy E.
Malangis, Sygi Evanne

Submitted to:
Reynante Casiro

September 2024
 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The birth of Filipino nationalism can be traced to various social, economic, and political
developments during the 19th century, especially when the Philippines became more integrated
into global commerce, therefore exposing the country to new ideas and ideals. This period saw
significant changes that shaped the Filipino identity and desire for independence, culminating in
the rise of nationalism by the end of the century.
The opening of the Philippines to world commerce transformed the country’s economy,
bringing in new wealth and opportunities for the middle class (clase media) to emerge. This new
social class, composed of educated Filipinos and local entrepreneurs, became influential in
spreading nationalist ideas. In line with this, exposure to European liberalism, especially under the
leadership of Spanish governor Carlos Maria de la Torre, introduced Filipinos to concepts like
freedom, equality, and democracy, further fueling nationalist sentiments under the colonial regime.
This growing sense of Filipino identity was, at the same time, a response to the social
injustices and racial discrimination experienced by the native population. The conflict between
Spanish regular clergy and Filipino secular clergy was another significant factor. When local
priests sought to have more control over parishes, the Spanish friars resisted and instead
encroached their authority. This is just one of the many unequal treatment experienced by Filipinos
in their own country.
The aforementioned factors such as commerce, the rise of the clase media, European
liberalism, racial discrimination, and regular secular conflicts merged to inspire a growing
movement for reform and independence.

INTRODUCTION

Nationalism, as conceptualized by Louis L. Snyder, is a state of mind where individuals

pledge their ultimate loyalty to the nation-state. This concept, originating during the 18th-century
French Revolution, emphasized collective identity and unity among people with shared language,
culture, and geography. By the 19th century, these ideas of nationalism began to influence the
Philippines, a country under Spanish colonial rule. The emergence of Filipino nationalism was
driven by the growing awareness of social and political injustices experienced under their
colonizers' rule. As Filipinos faced systemic exploitation and racial discrimination, their collective
grievances sparked a rising sense of national identity and unity.
The rise of Filipino nationalism was not merely a reaction to Spanish oppression but also
a complex process influenced by various internal and external factors. While Snyder highlights the
Spanish colonial period as pivotal in shaping Filipino nationalism, it is essential to recognize that
this national consciousness was also significantly shaped by Filipino agency and local aspirations.
This report explores how these Filipino historical figures, along with economic changes, liberal
ideologies, racial discrimination, and secularization contributed to the development of Filipino
nationalism and the quest for self-determination and identity.

BODY

Filipino Nationalism
Nationalism, as a modern concept, emerged during the 18th-century French Revolution,
emphasizing a collective identity among people sharing a common language, traditions, and
geography. Defined by Louis L. Snyder, nationalism fosters a sense of unity within a specific
group. By the 19th century, this concept began influencing the Philippines through European ideas
and trade, setting the stage for the rise of Filipino nationalism.
Louis Snyder defines nationalism as the aspiration of nations expressed through shared ideals
and collective goals. He particularly emphasizes that Filipino nationalism began to take shape
during the Spanish Colonial Period. According to Snyder, factors such as the rise of a common
 3

religion, international trade, and social positions contributed to the emergence of nationalism.
While Snyder's definition captures some important aspects of the rise of Filipino nationalism, it is
necessary to expand his view, as it simplifies the complex origins of national consciousness in the
Philippines.
Snyder’s emphasis on the Spanish colonial era as the sole period in which Filipino nationalism
developed is correct in highlighting the significant impact of colonialism. However, this
perspective overlooks the fact that Filipino nationalism was not just a byproduct of Spanish
influence. As Kundra (2019) reflects, nationalism and national identity are dynamic concepts
shaped by multiple factors, including race, language, religion, and political aspirations. In the
Philippine context, nation-building is an ongoing and multifaceted process, heavily influenced by
the country's diverse culture, history, and colonial experiences.
The contributions of key figures such as Jose Rizal, Marcelo H. Del Pilar, and Andres
Bonifacio during the Spanish period were undeniably crucial to the rise of Filipino nationalism.
Through their writings, resistance, and leadership, they helped define Filipino identity and foster
unity in the face of colonial oppression. However, as Quibuyen (2002) critically argues, Filipino
nationalism was not simply a reaction to Spanish rule but was also driven by the independent
aspirations of Filipinos themselves. These leaders were actively shaping a national identity that
reflected local values and the distinct socio-political realities of their time. Thus, Snyder's
argument that nationalism was solely shaped by external factors like colonialism fails to account
for the agency of Filipinos in their struggle for self-determination.
Furthermore, Meadows (1970) points out that the resurgence of nationalism in the Philippines
encountered various challenges, such as internal conflicts and the lingering effects of colonial rule.
These divisions often mirrored broader societal rifts, including those based on class, geography,
and ideology. While colonialism undeniably left a legacy of dependence, it is vital to stress that
Filipino nationalism was not purely a product of colonial oppression. As Akmad (2024) said that,
internal factors such as economic changes, education, and secularization also played pivotal roles
in the development of national consciousness. The determination of Filipinos to define their own
identity and future was equally significant and deserves greater emphasis in discussions of
nationalism.
Filipino nationalism was not solely imposed from external forces like Spanish colonialism but
was equally shaped by the actions, ideas, and aspirations of Filipinos themselves. This more
nuanced understanding reveals that nationalism in the Philippines was a complex and evolving
process, driven by both external influences and internal efforts to forge a distinct national identity.

Factors Influencing the Rise of Filipino Nationalism: Positive & Negative

Several factors hindered the growth of Filipino nationalism during Spanish colonial rule.
Before Spanish colonization, the native population lacked a unified national identity. The Spanish
exacerbated this division by using "Filipino" exclusively for Spanish-born individuals and
derogatorily referring to natives as "indios." This system emphasized local identities and hindered
the development of a cohesive national consciousness. Additionally, the Spanish implemented a
"divide et impera" strategy, pitting Filipinos against each other and employing foreign
mercenaries, such as the Macabebes, merdekas from Maluku, and Japanese soldiers, to suppress
uprisings. Technological and military imbalances further weakened resistance, as the Spanish
possessed advanced weaponry like cannons and muskets, while the natives had simpler arms. The
Spanish also co-opted the Filipino principalía by granting them privileges, thereby undermining
collective resistance. Restrictions on movement and coordination, enforced through papeletas de
permiso (travel permits) and cartas de radio (safe-conduct passes), further constrained Filipinos'
ability to organize and resist effectively.
Despite these obstacles, several factors accelerated the rise of Filipino nationalism. In the 19th
century, the spread of liberal ideologies from Europe and America inspired Filipinos, especially
the elite, to seek political change and autonomy. The opening of Manila and other provincial ports
to international trade in 1834 marked a turning point, leading to significant economic growth and
the emergence of a middle class (clase media). The value of Philippine exports rose dramatically,
from ₱4.8 million in 1810 to ₱33.1 million in 1894, although economic instability persisted due to
the devaluation of the Mexican silver peso during the Philippine Revolution in 1896. This growth
was facilitated by the establishment of foreign consulates and the expansion of provincial ports.
 4

Other key events such as the Cavite Mutiny of 1872, the liberal reforms under Governor-General
Carlos María de la Torre, regular secular conflict, and formation of nationalist groups due to racial
discrimination further fueled the growing desire for independence. Exploring these aspects reveals
how they collectively contributed to the burgeoning nationalist sentiment in the Philippines.

A. World Commerce (1834-1898)

The period from 1834 to 1898 was marked by significant economic expansion in the
Philippines, driven by increased global commerce. The opening of Manila and other provincial
ports to international trade in 1834 was pivotal in ending Spain’s monopolistic practices and
spurring economic activity. This change led to a rise in exports and the development of a
burgeoning middle class. The establishment of foreign consulates by Russia and the United States
as early as 1817, followed by France and Germany in 1835, Great Britain in 1844, and Japan in
1888, strengthened international relations and facilitated trade. The expansion of provincial ports,
such as Sual, Iloilo, Zamboanga, Cebu, Legaspi, and Leyte, further boosted trade and economic
growth. Despite these advancements, the economic prosperity was tempered by the devaluation of
the Mexican silver peso, which affected overall economic stability during the Philippine
Revolution in 1896.

B. Clase Media
The rise of the clase media, or middle class, was also a notable development during this period.
Emerging from economic growth, this class included wealthy native entrepreneurs and mestizos,
who became increasingly politically aware. Social status was displayed through land ownership,
the acquisition of imported goods, and luxury items. Residential choices and material possessions
further reflected their status. In Manila, the social structure was marked by distinctions between
areas such as Intramuros, home to the elite Spanish community, and districts like San Miguel and
Sampaloc, known for their fashionable and elite presence. Extramuros communities, including
Binondo, Quiapo, Tondo, and Parian de los Sangleyes, illustrated Manila’s diverse social fabric
and the varying socio-economic statuses of its inhabitants.

C. European Liberalism and Carlos Maria de la Torre

During the late 19th century, liberal ideas from Europe began to filter into the Philippines.
These ideas arrived partly due to the shortened travel time between Spain and the Philippines after
the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869. The liberalism spreading from Europe challenged the long-
standing conservative and feudal mindset in which the Filipino population had been largely
confined. Concepts of liberty, justice, and individual rights began influencing the minds of the
educated class in the Philippines, which pushed against traditional beliefs and colonial oppression.
Thoughts of liberty, equality, and human rights were gaining traction, particularly those that
had been fostered during the French and American revolutions. Philosophers such as John Locke
and Jean-Jacques Rousseau were instrumental in shaping these liberal ideals. Their writings,
particularly Locke's "Two Treatises on Government" in 1689 and Rousseau's "The Social
Contract" in 1762, emphasized the right of the people to overthrow governments that failed to
protect their rights. These ideas resonated with the Filipino intelligentsia, who saw the Spanish
colonial regime as oppressive and unjust. Naturally, the rise of these liberal influences contributed
to the awakening of a nationalist sentiment among Filipinos.
When Carlos Maria de la Torre became the Governor-General of the Philippines in 1869, he
aimed to implement reforms that would provide more freedom and equality to the Filipinos. De la
Torre took several significant steps towards reform, such as abolishing press censorship,
promoting freedom of speech, and attempting to end corporal punishment for Filipino deserters.
He even interacted with Filipino elites, a move that shocked the Spaniards in Manila.
Despite his attempts at reform, de la Torre’s tenure was marked by inconsistencies. While he
appeared committed to liberal ideas, he also maintained strong ties with the Spanish authorities
and the Church, both of which continued to suppress more radical reformist movements. He even
spied on Filipino revolutionaries and opposition leaders, leading to the arrest and imprisonment of
Filipino intellectuals and activists such as Fr. Jose Burgos. This duality in his leadership left a
mixed legacy.
 5

D. Racial Discrimination
Racial discrimination was a prominent consequence of the hierarchical social structure
during the Spanish colonial period, with divisions based primarily on skin color and origin. As
noted by Maria Dolores Elizalde in her article on racial divisions in the Spanish colonial
Philippines, these racial boundaries significantly influenced social dynamics by assigning different
rights, obligations, and opportunities based on skin color. The system favored Spanish-born
individuals, creoles, European Spaniards, Spanish mestizos, native elites, and newly emerged
urban and professional classes. This entrenched racial discrimination played a crucial role in
shaping societal impacts and was instrumental in igniting the Filipino revolutionary movement.

a. The Observation of In-Action Racism

During the Spanish colonial period, severe racism against Filipinos was pervasive. As Pardo
de Tavera observed, “Although the laws recognized no difference between the various races,
nevertheless from the beginning of the nineteenth century the Spaniards claimed superiority over
the Filipinos, and so taught their children.” Filipinos were compelled to show deference to
Spaniards in numerous ways, such as removing their hats when a Spaniard passed by, and
particularly respecting high-ranking officials like priests by kissing their hands. Filipinos, or
“Indios,” were also prohibited from sitting at the same table as Spaniards, even if the Spaniard was
a guest in their own home. Spaniards typically addressed Filipinos with the informal pronoun
“thou,” and even those Filipino women who married Spaniards were consistently viewed as
belonging to an inferior class.

b. Vitriolic Literature During the Reform Movement

The tension between Spaniards, particularly the friars, and Filipinos escalated further during
the Reform Movement. Anti-Filipino writers such as Fr. Miguel Lucio y Bustamante, Francisco
Canamaque, Pablo Feced, and Wenceslao E. Retana produced vitriolic literature that unfairly
criticized Filipinos. They disparaged Filipinos as being “neither a merchant nor an industrialist,
neither a farmer nor a philosopher,” and depicted them as inept and dependent on Spanish
guidance. For instance, Francisco Canamaque, a former Spain’s Undersecretary of State, expressed
his disdain for Filipinos' perceived laziness and incompetence in works like Las Islas Filipinas
(Madrid, 1880).
Pablo Feced, known by the pseudonym “Quioquiao,” exhibited extreme animosity towards
Filipinos in his work Filipinas; esbozos y pinceladas (Manila, 1888), referring to rural Filipinos
as a “carabao herd” and quoting Fr. Gaspar de San Agustin, who compared Filipinos to rattan,
suggesting they required physical punishment. Wenceslao E. Retana, who is recognized as the first
biographer of Jose Rizal, frequently criticized the Filipino nationalist movement and leaders in his
works such as Historia de la Revolución Filipina, comparing the difference of competency
between Spanish leaders and Filipino leaders. While his historical accounts are valuable in the
perspective that he was able to record important events including Rizal’s achievements and
contribution during the era, his accounts are marred by personal biases and an anti-Filipino
perspective.
The most virulent attack came from Franciscan Fr. Miguel Lucio y Bustamante’s Si Tandang
Basio Macunat (Manila, 1885). Bustamante mocked the idea that Filipinos could never learn the
Spanish language or achieve civilization, stating, “The Spaniards will always be Spaniards, and
the indio will always be an indio… The monkey will always be a monkey however you dress him
with a shirt and trousers.” He further insisted that a Filipino who distances himself from his carabao
becomes bad and ungrateful to God and King.

c. The Spark of Filipino National Identity due to Discrimination

Despite the entrenched racial hierarchy, Michael Gonzalez highlights that Spanish Manila
began to see shifts as intermarriages blurred social distinctions, granting lower classes, such as
mestizos, access to the white Spanish elite, colonial positions, and higher education previously
reserved for the white population. This period of racial transition allowed families with the means
to send their sons to Madrid—like Jose Rizal, Antonio Luna, and Juan Luna—to be exposed to
European libertarian ideas. These ideas would later help shape the Filipino national identity
through the establishment of the ilustrados. The injustices and systemic racism faced by Filipinos
intensified their desire for change, fueling their quest for equality and national identity. This
emerging Filipino consciousness was further solidified with the creation of the Katipunan, led by
Andres Bonifacio, which rallied native urban workers, farmers, and lower-level government
officials around a unified identity that transcended skin color. By celebrating the native brown
complexion, or “kayumanggi,” as a symbol of pride and crafting terms like “bayan Tagalog” for
 6

nationhood and “Inang Bayan” for the Motherland, the movement fostered a strong sense of
Filipino identity and drove the revolutionary movement against colonial rule.

E. Regular Secular Conflict

a. Secularization Overview
Secularization was intended as the transfer of ministries established or run by regular clergy
which were clergymen mostly Spanish friars that were affiliated to religious orders such as the
Recollects, Dominicans, and Augustinians to seculars which were clergymen that were mostly
native Filipino priests that were not affiliated with any religious order, and were specifically
trained to run parishes (Agoncillo,1990).

b. Earlier Attempts at Secularization

Philip II proclaimed in 1585 that the seculars should lead mission establishment efforts if there
were sufficient numbers of competent secular priests and that the seculars should also oversee
parish administration. Ferdinand VI proclaimed in 1753 that there were sufficient competent
secular individuals to replace the regulars in parish duties, allowing them to take over right away
in the event of a vacancy. This was properly changed four years later. Ferdinand VI, however,
intended to place the regular clergy under papal supervision and royal patronage rather than
genuinely secularizing the parishes. The parishes were actually secularized only when Archbishop
Basilio Sancho de Santa Justa y Rufina was already in office (Agoncillo,1990).

c. Dialogue on Secularization
The friars have been profiting from the infamous practice of underestimating the qualifications
and talents of the Filipino clergy in order to establish themselves as perpetual curates in the Islands,
as stated by Father Jose Burgos' in his "Manifesto que a la noble nacion espanola" (1864). He also
portrayed the Archbishop Sancho de Santa Justa y Rufina as "very worthy and wise." A prejudiced
Spanish author claimed that the Filipino is only useful as a subordinate "because of his
idiosyncracies, his character." However, Dr. Luciano P.R. Santiago's academic research disproved
the myths propagated by both Filipino and foreign authors regarding the qualifications of native
Filipino priests, disproving the conventional wisdom that “no native Filipino, or Indio, priest was
ordained before the 1720's” with proof like the existence of the first known indigenous priest, B.D.
Francisco Baluyot (1698), as well as Eurasian and Native American priests who lived earlier in
the seventeenth century, such as B.D. and Don Agustin Tabuyo of Cagayan (1621). Miguel
Jeronimo (1655) from Pampanga (Agoncillo,1990).

d. Secularization
After the Jesuit expulsion in 1768, the seculars in Manila, Cavite, and the Visayas took
control of several Jesuit parishes. The Augustinians filed a protest with the Spanish crown in 1774
when Governor Simon de Anda forcibly took away seventeen parishes in Pampanga and gave them
to Filipino seculars. Because of this, even after the King secularized the parishes with the
stipulation that one or two of the wealthier parishes in each province should stay with the regulars,
Anda was given the responsibility that same year to restore the Pampanga parishes
(Agoncillo,1990).
The complete occupation of recently formed curacies of Santa Rosa by the Dominicans
and Imus and Las Pinas by the Recollects, all belonging to the secular clergy, sparked disputes
between the secular and regular groups. The three Tagalog parishes were swiftly returned to the
seculars by 1803, due to the governor-general's refusal to comply with the ecclesiastical cabildo's
plea to the crown that the parishes remain under the regular clergy in his capacity as vice-regal
patron. Malate had been an Augustinian territory until 1822, when it was assigned to a secular
priest (Agoncillo,1990).

e. Injustices to the Secular Clergy

By the time the friars regained control of all the parishes that had been taken from them in the
eighteenth century in 1826, Spain witnessed a complete change in its secularization policy
following the revolutions in Latin America. There were no objections voiced against the 1826
decree; nevertheless, the March 9, 1849 edict granted the Recollects and Dominicans seven
additional curacies in Cavite. The pioneers of the native clergy's nationalist movement were Father
Pedro Pelaez in Manila and Father Mariano Gomez in Cavite (Agoncillo,1990).
As restitution for the Mindanao curacies granted to the Jesuits who returned in 1859, the
majority of the secularly administered parishes were turned over to the Recollects in the decrees
 7

of 1861. which ultimately meant that the already modest number of parishes under the control of
the Filipino seculars would be further reduced. From the viewpoint of the Filipino people, this was
a deliberate tactic by the Spanish government to impede the advancement of the native clergy. A
decade later, only 181 of the 792 curacies were under Filipino control. Parish-grabbing gave rise
to increased clashes between secular and regular clergy in Antipolo and San Rafael, where vacant
parishes left by deceased secular priests were taken (Agoncillo,1990).
As one of the customary May pilgrimage sites, the Antipolo parish, famed for its brown virgin,
was regarded as both "la perla de los Curatos" and "one of the richest parishes in the Archipelago"
because "so numerous valuable gifts were offered in the masses" by her devotees. The Bulacan
parish of San Rafael, which Recollects claimed, was formerly a section of a hacienda that San Juan
de Dios had owned in the eighteenth century. At that time, the only people living there were about
80 Filipino cowtenders and farmers; but, by the time the Augustinians claimed it in 1870, its
income had increased by 13,000 parishoners. There were 792 curacies during this period, of which
611 were held by regulars and 181 by seculars (Agoncillo,1990).

f. Response of the Filipino Seculars

The discriminatory and exclusive clauses of the 1849 and 1861 decrees caused an upset in the
Filipino seculars. In 1870, Archbishop Gregorio Meliton Martinez of Manila was compelled to
compose an expose to Marshal Francisco Serrano, the Spanish regent, "to maintain the tranquility
of his diocese, which has been frequently disturbed as a result of the practice of turning over
curacies administered by the secular clergy to the religious corporations. The animosity between
seculars and regulars is developing as a result of this strategy, and it could eventually have
lamentable effects on our beloved Spain." The Cavite Mutiny of 1872 broke out less than two years
later, exactly as the Archbishop had predicted. The native priests were in fact "political
dynamite.”(Agoncillo,1990).

F. La Algarada Caviteña (The Cavite Mutiny of 1872)

a. Background and Causes

The Cavite Mutiny occurred during the rule of Governor Rafael de Izquierdo, who declared
his intent to govern strictly, symbolizing it with a "cross in one hand and a sword in the other."
Discontent against Spanish authorities had been growing due to economic hardships and
discriminatory policies. Filipino workers in the Cavite Arsenal, angered by unjust wage deductions
and the revocation of exemptions from tribute and forced labor, were further provoked by unpaid
wages and unfair tobacco payments from 1870-1871.

b. The Mutiny
On the night of January 20, 1872, about 200 Filipino soldiers, joined by Arsenal workers,
revolted under the leadership of Sergeant La Madrid. The rebellion began after payday frustrations
over wage cuts. La Madrid was killed when a sack of gunpowder exploded, while the fort
commander was also killed, and his wife wounded. The mutiny was fueled by the unfair treatment
of Filipino soldiers, who faced racial discrimination and received lower pay and poorer rations
than their Spanish counterparts.

c. Spanish Response and Perception

Although localized, Spanish authorities overreacted, viewing the mutiny as a significant
threat to colonial rule, suspecting it to be part of a larger movement for Filipino independence.
Father Mariano Gomez, Father Jose Burgos, and Father Jacinto Zamora (Gomburza) were unjustly
accused of inciting the revolt. Despite Governor Izquierdo’s demands, Archbishop Meliton
Martinez refused to defrock the priests before their execution by garrote on February 17, 1872.

d. Aftermath and Legacy

The bodies of Gomburza were secretly buried in an unmarked grave in Paco Cemetery.
The unjust execution of the priests and the harsh crackdown on suspected conspirators had lasting
effects on the rise of Filipino nationalism. Jose Rizal, reflecting on the mutiny in 1889, noted that
the sacrifice of these innocent victims only strengthened the nationalist cause, inspiring new
generations of Filipinos to resist Spanish rule. Rizal's observation highlighted the lasting impact
of the mutiny on the growing anti-colonial sentiment across the Philippines.
 8

CONCLUSION
The topic highlights the emergence of Filipino nationalism as a complex, dynamic
movement shaped by both internal and external forces. Although racial discrimination and
persecution during Spanish colonial rule contributed significantly to the formation of early
nationalist sentiments, outside factors cannot be entirely attributed for the birth of Filipino
nationalism.
Prominent individuals like José Rizal, Marcelo H. Del Pilar, and Andrés Bonifacio played
a pivotal role in creating a unique national identity, motivated by their personal goals and the socio-
political circumstances of their context. Their efforts demonstrate that Filipino nationalism was
both a self-determined process and a response to colonial tyranny, along with the influence of
European liberal concepts, economic developments, and internal divides. Since in addition to
overcoming colonial restrictions, internal strife and regional disparities also had to be overcome
in the fight for a single national identity. As a result, the dynamic interaction between outside
forces and Filipino agency formed Filipino nationalism, which represents a complex and varied
journey to freedom.

In conclusion, the phenomena of Filipino nationalism was dynamic and multifaceted,

influenced by both internal and external factors. The movement was essentially defined by the
active involvement of Filipinos in creating their national identity, even if Spanish colonialism
and worldwide economic shifts created the framework for nationalist emotions to blossom. It is
necessary to acknowledge the interaction of internal and foreign forces as well as the variety of
influences that impacted the country's route to independence in order to comprehend Filipino
nationalism.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Akmad, A. P. (2024). Scholarly Exploration of Nationalism: A Retrospective View.

sshjournal.com. https://doi.org/10.18535/sshj.v8i09.1267
Claudio, L. E. (2013, March 27). Postcolonial Fissures and the Contingent Nation An
antinationalist critique of Philippine historiography. Claudio | Philippine Studies:
Historical and Ethnographic Viewpoints.
https://ojs.philippinestudies.net/index.php/ps/article/view/4062
Gonzalez, M. (2020, July 8). The Colonial Legacy of Racism among Filipinos — Positively
Filipino | Online magazine for Filipinos in the diaspora. Positively Filipino | Online
Magazine for Filipinos in the Diaspora. https://www.positivelyfilipino.com/magazine/the-
colonial-legacy-of-racism-among-filipinos
OpenLibrary.org. (1990). History of the Filipino people by Teodoro A. Agoncillo | Open Library.
Open Library.
https://openlibrary.org/books/OL17627815M/History_of_the_Filipino_people
Project MUSE - Philippine Studies: Historical and Ethnographic Viewpoints. (n.d.).
https://muse.jhu.edu/journal/531
Quibuyen, F. (1997). Rizal and the Revolution. Quibuyen | Philippine Studies: Historical and
Ethnographic Viewpoints.
https://www.philippinestudies.net/ojs/index.php/ps/article/view/548
The new nationalism. (n.d.). Routledge & CRC Press. https://www.routledge.com/The-New-
Nationalism/Snyder/p/book/9780765805508#:~:text=Nationalism%2C%20the%20state%
20of%20mind,according%20to%20no%20preconceived%20pattern.
Today in Philippine history, September 28, 1862, Wenceslao Retana, the foremost non-Filipino
Filipinologist, was born in Boadilla del Monte, Spain. (2024, March 15). The Kahimyang
Project. https://kahimyang.com/kauswagan/articles/2863/today-in-philippine-history-
september-28-1862-wenceslao-retana-the-foremost-non-filipino-filipinologist-was-born-
in-boadilla-del-monte-spain
Vic, S. [sir_vic2013]. (2013). A Critique of Philippine Nationalism From Reformism To
Radicalism To Opportunism. scribd.com. Retrieved September 12, 2024, from
https://www.scribd.com/document/117104140/A-Critique-of-Philippine-Nationalism-
From-Reformism-to-Radicalism-to-
Opportunism?fbclid=IwY2xjawFTBAhleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHQnvcCYytNB37--
qVcItuLHpcoALI7KzM2ffwuku3jOxr0DhWIuIetVdaA_aem_BCx-
TQQ9MMTOg5Bylj_d5Q